Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)

On 10/17/2013 10:03 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> My guess is that it won't be committed if there is a single "but it
> might break one code or surprise one user somewhere in the universe",
> but I wish I'll be proven wrong. IMO, "returned with feedback" on a 1
> liner is really akin to "rejected".

I have attached here an entirely new patch (new documentation and
everything) that should please everyone. It no longer overloads
pg_sleep(double precision) but instead add two new functions:

* pg_sleep_for(interval)
* pg_sleep_until(timestamp with time zone)

Because it's no longer overloading the original pg_sleep, Robert's
ambiguity objection is no more.

Also, I like how it reads aloud: SELECT pg_sleep_for('5 minutes');

If people like this, I'll reject the current patch and add this one to
the next commitfest.

Opinions?

--
Vik